£1.7million. What are we actually paying for?

[3littlefrogs]

Please can someone explain what this bill is for?
Goods?
Services?
I genuinely don't know, so would be grateful if someone better informed could explain.
Thanks

Billion

Do you mean this excess or in general?

for mep farrages outrageous expenses claims

Billion???
Gosh - I must have misheard.

Both SwedishEdith. Of course I understand the general principles of taxation but I would like to know what the specifics of each country's contribution to the EU covers.

The extra £1.7Bn is for another massive wheeze from Gidiot. He had the stupid idea of including prostitution and illegal drug sales to our GDP figures so it looked like the economy was growing. Now it's come back to bite them in the arse they're moaning. Italy did the same and they face a similar penalty.

From what I understand this "Bill" is for the fact our economy is larger than originally thought.

Adding prostitution and the black market to official figures wasn't to make our economy look bigger but to make it the same figures as other countries such as Germany & Greece where prostitution is legal. Beforehand we had a situation where each country had different ways of measuring the size of their economy and how much we paid into the EU was based on that.

Bear in mind the formula was agreed unanimously by all nation states including the UK.

So the £1.7billion is a one off bill to account for the fact that some countries have been paying in too much for the last 12 years and others have paid in too little.

The reality is that £1.7 billion over 12 years is nothing. Peanuts. Economically speaking we agreed to it, we should pay it.

Politically though it's dynamite. The last thing Cameron needed right now was a big bill from the EU. In fact you'd think that the sensible thing for the EU to have done was to present the bill but say "But hey....we know this is about as welcome as a finger up your arse, how about we find a way to split the payments so it's not so politically explosive?"

No UK politician right now can be seen to be soft on the EU. (Well other than the lib dems who won't win anything anyway so have nothing to lose!)

My opinion is that Cameron won't pay it on Dec 1st like he's said, he'll make a bit of a song & dance about it. Kick it out until after the next election then whoever is in charge then will just quietly pay it.

I do have to wonder sometimes if despite what the EU are saying that they really want UK to remain members. Actions speak louder than words and in this instance their actions just don't help the pro-European UK people fight their cause.

Isn't there an issue about the European parliament never actually having its own accounts audited?

It's comparable to income tax.

If you agreed to pay 1%, and you estimated you would earn a million, you knew you probably would owe £10,000, so you should post off your cheque.

If, however, you have a good year and earn one million, one hundred and seventy thousand, then you pay an extra £1,700.

The UK did better than expected, so has to pay the 1% on the extra.

Countries that did less well than expected get a rebate of 1% on their shortfall.

Getting outraged and pretending that you had no idea you had earned one million, one hundred and seventy thousand, or that it isn't fair that you have to pay the 1% you had already agreed, makes Cameron you look like a fool.

Interestingly, it is reported than Angela is now saying, "If you feel you have to go, David, don't let the door hit your arse on the way out"

So the only way out of a bureaucratic socialist nightmare that refuses to reform when the EU has nearly double our unemployment level, flat growth and flirting with a triple recession and still thinks that ‘IT’ is always right – is to take up the ‘fool’ Cameron’s back up plan to an intransigent EU, and support the Conservatives in the 2017 EU ‘in/out’ Referendum, where democratically ‘the people’ will hear both sides of the argument and VOTE.

Re comparable to income tax and the UK did better than expected, as that is far from the truth, the EU bill is adding a socialist ‘collective’ insult, to socialist injury.

The UK’s economic growth in the 2000’s was different to other mature EU economies as was built on sand, financed by record City profits, record high street lending, record consumer debt, an asset bubble, a larger increase in benefits/welfare payments etc. as well as spurious estimates of drugs and prostitution.

Those receipts helped (with an annual 30 billion plus deficit spend) to finance record government spending (including on itself with over 1 million new employees) within an expensive quangocracy, rising in an annual real terms higher than any other European country.

www.economicshelp.org/blog/5509/economics/government-spending-under-labour/

And when the financial crash happened, the tax receipts stopped, but the expenditure wasn’t cut, and HENCE the size of our annual budget deficit in 2010 was 157 billion, which in nominal terms (the only accurate way to look at it), was higher than any onter country within the EU.

So when looking at the definition of GDP below, bearing in mind our manufacturing sector was halved from 1997 to 2010 (a million jobs were lost by 2005), the EU should see just how UNBALANCED/UNSUSTAINABLE our GDP growth was, and far from getting future economic benefits from it e.g. if it was spent on infrastructure, rather than fat government – so should be feeling sorry for the UK taxpayer, and paying us back money.

www.investopedia.com/terms/g/gdp.asp
Private Consumption/Spending + Government Spending + Business capital Spending + Net Exports (Exports – Imports).

Well that was a very long way of saying "it isn't fair" that we, like the other countries, should pay what we'd agreed to.

The rules are not set by some bunch of aliens where the UK and the other countries have no voice.

(although if UK decides to walk out, we will give up our voice)

As you appeared to assume that that the EU was only claiming what was due, if I’d have very seasonally said that during the period the EU are claiming a payment for, that ‘IMO the UK had the wrong kind of GDP’ – you (and others) would have been wetting yourselves laughing, so I put forward the case, so it could be challenged.

Look, as Cameron said, what “other countries agree to” are the annual EU revisions where our contribution is revised up a bit, or down – but this is a huge retroactive bill going back over a decade, calculated on flawed UK productivity assumptions, that discounted the annual/national debt repercussions. – but include a new category of Prostitution, Drugs and god knows what else.

The bureaucrats in Brussels looking to continually fund their failed EU experiment were (knowingly?) wrong to calculate it the way they did, but each member country supplying them with data (especially the UK, no doubt too honest for the taxpayers own good) SHOULD have questioned such a retroactive contribution revision.

So although everyone knew a decision was coming, for the UK, both the size and due date (no doubt fixed so soon to try and head off requests for the full details of those calculations), was a slap in the face with a wet kipper.

So Cameron has every right to ask the EU, on behalf of every taxpayer, the full basis of their assumption, point out that we STILL have the largest annual budget deficit in the EU - and let the UK Treasury go over them with a fine toothed comb - and THEN pat what is due. IMO.

Re “our voice” in an “alien” EU that can have 28 others shouting from a different direction, and where member countries on another planet can tell the Commission and European Central Bank for years to F.R.O. when they are told by them to ‘stick by the rules and reduce your budged deficit no’ i.e. France and Italy – lets see WHAT GOOD our voice has done, re our contribution fairness, when WE THINK we can negotiate ‘fairly’.

“Thanks to Blair UK contributions to EU have DOUBLED in five years to £8billion ...even before the latest bill for extra £1.7billion”

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2814147/UK-contributions-payments-EU-DOUBLED-five-years-8billion-latest-bill-extra-1-7bn.html
• UK was £8.6billion worse off in 2013, up from £4.3billion in 2009
• Ukip leader Nigel Farage says Britain cannot afford to stay in the EU
• Biggest cause of rise was Tony Blair sacrificing part of EU rebate
• Margaret Thatcher secured rebate in 1984 by banging on the table
• Comes as Brussels demands an extra £1.7billion by December 1
• Sharp rise in support for leaving the EU after row over shock bill
• Nick Clegg travels to Paris to seek support from France over battle.

"Our voice" within the UK does need to be heard, via the EU Referendum other countries had, we were promised, but never given prior to the signing of the Lisbon Treaty by Mr Brown.

The 'rules' were made up when there were just several mature economy members; but many of those founding rules have been broken as the EU allowed in new members that should not have qualified, and old members struggled with unreformed economies they STILL refuse to change.

The UK in the original common market would do fine, but as is, it looks as it it will take us down with it - which is why we need to hear the FULL FACTS, from both sides, and then vote on it.

"no doubt fixed"

Where do you suppose the calculation was done?

Are you looking for the country, capital, office block name, or room number?

The country will suffice.

"Interestingly, it is reported than Angela is now saying, "If you feel you have to go, David, don't let the door hit your arse on the way out" "

Yes she's a bit of a force isn't she. Still I hope she doesn't put us off negotiating with these strong personalities in the EU for a fair system. The EU system surely should evolve and change like any other organisation. This EU's 'freedom of movement' stance for EU workers for instance, seems to have a few holes in it that need TIGHTENING UP.
Don't think it's time to pull the plug yet.

Piglet ... as the "no doubt fixed" reference I made, was regarding the early payment date of the £1.7 bil, I think that it is fair to say, that it was NOT England.

Inkanta ... I suspect, this is all part of the usual EU negotiating 'dance'; one side wants a full negotiation, the other says no negotiation, and they sit around a table of 28 and 'orse trade.

As Ukippers and Tory back benchers will tell you, Cameron is (as am I) a pro a lean, mean, EU bureaucratic machine, along the Founding common market lines, and he neither has the ability (with a minority party government) or will , to take an early bath and then 'pull the plug' on the EU.

The 'one sized fits all' currency and interest rate was NEVER going to work with so many countries with such different/diverse economies, just think of the UK, where we could often argue for a different north - south Uk Base Rate.

So as the U.S. found (if memory serves, taking 3 attempts to get a currency UNITED States of America) it was never going to be a simple union and likely to come apart at the first major recession.

Typically, the EU wonks solution is CLOSER union, that is their direction of travel, and the on-going question will be, on a 2 or maybe 3 speed Europe - with the original die hards in the first, with a 'mix 'n match' menu for the 2nd and 3rd speeds - does the UK still have a future within.

On a 2-3 speed solution, there will HAVE to be concessions on immigration/freedom of movement anyway, so why leave it?

To me it feels as though the UK has really tightened its belt, pay freezes everywhere while other EU countries haven't been so harsh and now we are being penalised. Simplistic I know but that is how it seems to me.

I think its fair to ask where that massive anount of money and whether its really fair for the UK to subside the failing Euro. What is the 1.7billion actually covering? Even if we do owe such a huge amount of money its unreasonable to expect the UK to pay in such a short time period. With UK income tax you have time to pay your tax IF you have filled in your time form in time. The inland revenue is reasonable provided you are honest and certainly there are ways of paying a large income tax bill in installments if you contact the HM Revenue in plenty of time.

I feel that the UK does need a referdum on staying in the UK as its clear that emotions are strong among many of the electorate of all parties. (except the lib dem) It is not Xenophobic to want a different future to the rest of the EU. Norway and Switzerland are not part of the EU and have a good relationship with EU countries.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/norway/9383678/Is-Norways-EU-example-really-an-option-for-Britain.html

angelos02 ….. I’m not sure if during the financial crisis you have heard of the P.I.G.S. (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain) who need IMF financial bailouts and had to serious ly cut their financial cloth to fit their finances, especially in services, like their heath service funding, cut up to 17%.

Europe as a whole, also has an unemployment rate of over 11%, versus ours, now down at 6% - and even the larger economies like Italy and France, who DID NOT need to cut their cloth with the IMF directed others, are find ing that they just delayed the inevitable – so believe it or not, the UK has done better than most, while having the largest annual overspend within Europe, £157 billion in 2010, around £100 billion now.

As to the pay freezes, most small to medium sized companies we helped here to grow/employ with various tax cuts i.e. Corporate Tax and National Insurance - are still struggling after the financial/economic crash, in todays weak global economy - plus we are in a low inflation environment.

The problem for the UK is we still need to bring our deficit down even though we have already cut the rough equivalent of France's 2010 figure, that has hardly moved, and penal taxes stifled their businesses and drove many of their wealthy out of France.

isitmebut

You appear to disagree with the amount of money that is due, calculated as 1% of the Actual, as previously agreed.

Where do you suppose the calculation was done?

ReallyTired .... Re Norway and Switzerland, I'd guess that similar to us, they'd be in the THIRD speed EU, but the UK diehards believe that we would 'lose our influential voice' - which i doubt we have ever had within an EU that will always be run by a French-German political axis, even if as now, their leaders disagree on many things.

I'll never forget, when the ECB/IMF bailed out the Ireland/Dublin government, the big guns INSISTED that they RAISE their highly competitive Corporate Tax of around 12% as a condition of loans, but Dublin refused, and thanks to their competitive edge, Ireland emerged from the bailout and paid back their loans before the others.

The moral of this story is that the EU as a 'collective', will always looks to penalize/stifle competitive economies; trying to take the City tax cash cow to Europe, charging the UK for dubious growth in the 2000's, and jealous of our current restructuring economic success, unwilling to help on that UK growth by allowing us, to have the immigration curbs they really want, but as a founding principle, can not be seen to change it to all the new States that joined for that reason.